Inger-Lise Aamot1, Siv Hege Forbord2, Trine Karlsen3, Asbjørn Støylen4. 1. K.G. Jebsen Centre of Exercise in Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway; Clinical Services, St. Olav's University Hospital, Norway. Electronic address: inger.lise.aamot@ntnu.no. 2. Clinical Services, St. Olav's University Hospital, Norway. 3. K.G. Jebsen Centre of Exercise in Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway; Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway. 4. Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway; Department of Cardiology, St. Olav's University Hospital, Norway.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether rating of perceived exertion using the Borg 6-20 scale is a valid method for achieving target exercise intensity during high-intensity interval training in cardiac rehabilitation. DESIGN: A single-group cross-over design. METHODS: Ten participants (56 (6.5) years) who were enrolled in a high-intensity interval training cardiac rehabilitation program were recruited. A target exercise intensity of Borg 17 (very hard) was used for exercise intensity guidance in the initial four exercise sessions that took place before a cardiopulmonary exercise test, as in usual care rehabilitation. The heart rate was recorded and blinded to the participants. After performing the test, the participants were then instructed using heart rate monitors openly for exercise guidance in four subsequent exercise sessions, at an intensity corresponding to 85-95% of peak heart rate. RESULTS: The mean exercise intensity during high-intensity bouts was 82% (6%) of peak heart rate for the rating of perceived exertion and 85% (6%) using heart rate monitors (p=0.005). Bland-Altman limits of agreement analysis with a mean bias showed a bias of 2.97 (-2.08, 8.02) percentage points for the two methods. Exercise intensity was highly repeatable with intra-class correlations of 0.95 (95% CI 0.86-0.99, p<0.001) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.88-0.99, p<0.001) in the exercise sessions using rating of perceived exertion and percentage of peak heart rate for intensity control, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rating of perceived exertion results in an exercise intensity below target during high-intensity interval training bouts in cardiac rehabilitation. Heart rate monitoring should be used for accurate intensity guidance.
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether rating of perceived exertion using the Borg 6-20 scale is a valid method for achieving target exercise intensity during high-intensity interval training in cardiac rehabilitation. DESIGN: A single-group cross-over design. METHODS: Ten participants (56 (6.5) years) who were enrolled in a high-intensity interval training cardiac rehabilitation program were recruited. A target exercise intensity of Borg 17 (very hard) was used for exercise intensity guidance in the initial four exercise sessions that took place before a cardiopulmonary exercise test, as in usual care rehabilitation. The heart rate was recorded and blinded to the participants. After performing the test, the participants were then instructed using heart rate monitors openly for exercise guidance in four subsequent exercise sessions, at an intensity corresponding to 85-95% of peak heart rate. RESULTS: The mean exercise intensity during high-intensity bouts was 82% (6%) of peak heart rate for the rating of perceived exertion and 85% (6%) using heart rate monitors (p=0.005). Bland-Altman limits of agreement analysis with a mean bias showed a bias of 2.97 (-2.08, 8.02) percentage points for the two methods. Exercise intensity was highly repeatable with intra-class correlations of 0.95 (95% CI 0.86-0.99, p<0.001) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.88-0.99, p<0.001) in the exercise sessions using rating of perceived exertion and percentage of peak heart rate for intensity control, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rating of perceived exertion results in an exercise intensity below target during high-intensity interval training bouts in cardiac rehabilitation. Heart rate monitoring should be used for accurate intensity guidance.
Authors: Bahar Irfan; Nathalia Céspedes; Jonathan Casas; Emmanuel Senft; Luisa F Gutiérrez; Mónica Rincon-Roncancio; Carlos A Cifuentes; Tony Belpaeme; Marcela Múnera Journal: User Model User-adapt Interact Date: 2022-07-19 Impact factor: 4.230
Authors: Yao Zhang; Beier Zhang; Liaoyan Gan; Limei Ke; Yingyao Fu; Qian Di; Xindong Ma Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-03 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Yaoshan Dun; Shane M Hammer; Joshua R Smith; Mary C MacGillivray; Benjamin S Simmons; Ray W Squires; Suixin Liu; Thomas P Olson Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-01-05
Authors: Ida Berglund; Elisabeth Kleivhaug Vesterbekkmo; Kjetil Retterstøl; Sigmund A Anderssen; Maria A Fiatarone Singh; Jørn W Helge; Stian Lydersen; Ulrik Wisløff; Dorthe Stensvold Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes Date: 2021-09-16